You are, presumably, cognisant of how that string of letters – [quote] ‘haietmoba’ [endquote] – is
the manner in which quite a few persons refer to the actualism method?

If not, it features prominently on this web page:(This Moment of Being
Alive)

I am curious as to why you characterise the way in which No. 28 has hijacked it, by making out it points to
nibbana, as being [quote] ‘a nice way of framing’ [endquote] the actualism method?

Regards, Richard.

January 10 2013

Re: Privacy vs. Public Interest

RICHARD: It is no secret that I had two major ‘nervous breakdowns’, and at least one minor
one (where I became catatonic and was rushed to a local hospital’s EU), the first of which occurred ‘with sudden onset’ (one
of the diagnostic symptoms) at sunrise on the 6th of September, 1981, and the second, also ‘with sudden onset’, in the late
afternoon of the 30th of October, 1992, in an abandoned cow-pasture.

RESPONDENT: Hi Richard, Appreciate the response. You say that that you have
suffered two major nervous breakdowns. The first one led to enlightement.

RICHARD: G’day No. 29, First, a technical point: a breakdown does not lead to something; a breakdown
is the onset of something – as per that ‘with sudden onset’ wording above – and that ‘something’, a mental disorder of
some sort, can be either mild or severe and either acute (of short duration) or chronic (long-lasting) and either curable or
incurable (inasmuch palliative care is prescribed to help manage the symptoms).

So, the first major breakdown was the onset of a very severe psychotic disorder – so severe, in fact, as to
entail massive delusions of grandeur and megalomania, such as being the ‘Parousia’ and the next ‘Maitreya’, for instance,
with acute dissociative and solipsistic thought patterns plus major reality impairment (object estrangement, space dislocation and
time distortion) – which persisted, night and day, for eleven years.

Now, at the time I did not know that it was a mental disorder – let alone a very severe psychotic disorder
– even though there was something suss about it all; it was only in that 30+ month period afterwards it gradually became clear
to me that spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment was insanity ... albeit an institutionalised insanity. Vis.:

• [Co-Respondent]: There is one important point that hit me in your response:

• [Richard]: ‘After my break-through into actual freedom I went through thirty months of mental
anguish thinking that I had lost the plot completely (although physically everything was perfect). No one could help me as nobody
had traversed this territory before’ [endquote].

How did you experience the mental anguish from the perspective of actual freedom?

• [Richard]: As a severe cerebral agitation ... it all happened only in the brain cells. There was perfect
sensate experiencing: the direct, startlingly intimate sensuousness of the eyes seeing, the ears hearing, the skin feeling, the
nose smelling and the tongue tasting all of their own accord (deliciously unfettered by a ‘me’ or an ‘I’) yet the
cognitive faculty was face-to-face with the stark fact that it had been living a deluded dissociative state for eleven years and
that religion – fuelled by its spirituality and mysticism – was nothing short of institutionalised insanity.(Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 7, 14 June 2000).

In fact, at the time of the onset of that very severe psychotic disorder, I did not even know that it was
spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment as I had never even heard of those terms let alone what they referred to. Vis.:

• [Respondent No. 45 (List B)]: By which way the first ‘I’ (ego or self) can expand and create the
second ‘I’ (‘I’ as soul/’I’ as ‘Self’ as ‘me’)?

• [Richard]: As a generalisation it has been traditionally held that there are three ways: 1. Jnani
(cognitive realisation as epitomised by the ‘neti-neti’ or ‘not this; not this’ approach). 2. Bhakti (affective
realisation as epitomised by devotional worship and surrender of will). 3. Yoga (bodily realisation as epitomised by the raising
of ‘kundalini’ and the opening of ‘chakras’).

• [Co-Respondent]: I’ve been following this discussion with interest and have a couple of questions
for you: Which of the 3 ways did you use to achieve spiritual enlightenment in 1981?

• [Richard]: Well, none of those 3 ways, actually; I inadvertently ‘discovered’ another way: ignorance.
I was aiming for the pure consciousness experience (PCE) and landed short of my goal ... and it took another 11 years to get here.
To explain: I have never followed anyone; I have never been part of any religious, spiritual, mystical or metaphysical group; I
have never done any disciplines, practices or exercises at all; I have never done any meditation, any yoga, any chanting of
mantras, any tai chi, any breathing exercises, any praying, any fasting, any flagellations, any ... any of those ‘Tried and True’
inanities; nor did I endlessly analyse my childhood for ever and a day; nor did I do never-ending therapies wherein one expresses
oneself again and again ... and again and again. By being born and raised in the West I was not steeped in the mystical religious
tradition of the East and was thus able to escape the trap of centuries of eastern spiritual conditioning.
I had never heard the words ‘Enlightenment’ or ‘Nirvana’ and so on until 1982 when talking to a man about my breakthrough,
into what I called an ‘Absolute Freedom’ via the death of ‘my-self’, in September 1981. He listened – he questioned me
rigorously until well after midnight – and then declared me to be ‘Enlightened’. I had to ask him what that was, such was my
ignorance of all things spiritual. He – being a nine-year spiritual seeker fresh from his latest trip to India – gave me a
book to read by someone called Mr. Jiddu Krishnamurti. That was to be the beginning of what was to become a long learning curve of
all things religious, spiritual, mystical and metaphysical for me.
I studied all this because I sought to understand what other peoples had made of such spontaneous experiences and to find out
where human endeavour had been going wrong.
I found out where I had been going wrong for eleven years ... self-aggrandisement is so seductive. (Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 16, 8 January 2001).

RESPONDENT: The second to AF.

RICHARD: As I am an actualist, and not an affer, your query indicates a double confusion (stemming
from both text popping-up hither and thither on the internet and claims of aff posted to various buddhistic forums) which would
not have come about had you utilised what is freely available on The Actual Freedom Trust website as your
guaranteed-to-be-accurate source material.

I have written to this forum before about how vital it is that there be this guaranteed-to-be-accurate
repository, of authentic reports/ descriptions/ explanations of an actual freedom from the human condition, so as to obviate any
such confusion as peoples are nowadays subject to (and thus necessitating me coming out of my retirement from writing in order to
clarify what others have muddied). Vis.:

• [Richard]: Does everybody reading this now see how vital it is that the integrity of The Actual Freedom
Trust web site remain inviolate?

• [Respondent No. 6]: I understand it fully. And protection of accuracy is of utmost importance as much
of the person behind it. And i speak out of personal experience that radical departure from conformity is persecuted as a rule
rather than an exception.

• [Richard]: And I ask this question because, once I am dead and gone, The Actual Freedom Trust web site,
with its (legally) registered imprimatur, will remain the only guaranteed-to-be-accurate repository of authentic reports/
descriptions/ explanations of an actual freedom from the human condition.

• [Respondent No. 6]: And that even an innocuous attempt to change it/or style can lead to compromising
of the entire enterprise.
and lucky, [No. 4]!! ( i am already jealous!) :-) [...]. (see)

Having clarified that: the second major breakdown was the onset of what has been officially diagnosed as a
chronic psychotic disorder entailing depersonalisation, derealisation, alexithymia and anhedonia – which began with a 30+ month
period of a macabre and gruesome ‘mental anguish’ that both psychiatrists and psychologists were baffled by – and which has
persisted for 20+ years.

Now, lest there be any confusion generated by my own words I will take this opportunity to add that I have
oft-times stated how I do find it cute that peace-on-earth, in this life-time and as this flesh-and-body, be considered, by sane
peoples, to be insanity. Vis.:

• [Co-Respondent]: It is just my impression that you’re a neurotic, semi-insane fake.

• [Richard]: I have been examined by two accredited psychiatrists and officially diagnosed as genuinely
psychotic (not just ‘neurotic’) and genuinely insane (not just ‘semi-insane’) ... only in these days of political
correctness the words ‘mental disorder’ are used instead of the word ‘insane’. There is nothing ‘fake’ about it ... is
an official record, duly stamped and notarised and so on.
Having clarified that point ... did you notice that your words ‘a neurotic, semi-insane fake’ amount to more or less the same
thing that Mr. William James said at the end of the quote I posted previously? Vis.: [quote]: ‘... the practically real world
for each one of us, the effective world of the individual, is the compound world, the physical facts and emotional values in
indistinguishable combination. Withdraw or pervert either factor of this complex resultant, and the kind of experience we call
pathological ensues’. (William James, ‘The Varieties of Religious Experience’; New York: The Modern Library, 1929; page
147).
Hmm ... ‘pathological’, eh? I do find it cute that the enabling of the already existing peace-on-earth, via an actual freedom
from the human condition, is considered to this very day to be a severe and incurable psychotic disorder.

• [Co-Respondent]: I can’t substantiate that, and certainly have no proofs or bibliography to back it
up – it’s just a feeling I have. Apologies if I’m wrong.

• [Richard]: There is no need to apologise as I am incapable of taking offence ... ‘twould be far better
to invest such regretful energy into examining what necessitated the need for an apology in the first place, non?(List B, No. 54, 17 May 2001a).

Even more to that point is that those same sane peoples, who consider me insane, consider insanity (albeit
institutionalised) to be the solution for all the ills of humankind – as in, all the ills of sanity – and deliberately leave
it out of the DSM IV because of ‘religious sensitivities’.

So as to clarify the entire sanity-insanity issue I will draw your attention to the following quotes. Vis.:

• [Richard]: ‘I have not been sane for many, many years now’.(List B, No. 10e, 18 April 2003).

• [Richard]: ‘As I was insane for 11 years – and sane for the preceding 34 years – I can report from
direct experience that there is a third alternative’.(

Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 25, 10 February 2003).

• [Richard]: ‘When ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself) becomes extinct
all its states of being, ranging from sanity through to insanity, also cease to be ... there is no ‘presence’ whatsoever here
in this actual world to be either sane or insane’.(List B, No. 19 l, 18
April 2003).

• [Richard]: ‘There is, of course, a third alternative to either sanity or insanity (insanity is but an
extreme form of sanity) ...’.(

Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 60d, 6 February 2005).

Furthermore, I characterise that third alternative, to either sanity or insanity, as salubrity (and the third
alternative, to either being sane or being insane, as being salubrious).

• ‘salubrity: the quality of being salubrious, healthiness, wholesomeness [conducive to general
well-being]’. (Oxford Dictionary).

• [Respondent]: ‘I can understand your point of view: ‘if this is sanity, let me be insane ... let me
go out of my mind’.
• [Richard]: ‘No, that is not what I have been saying at all: what I have been asking is whether it is possible for you to see
sanity so completely that you will cease being sane ... end of story. Here in this actual world all is salubrious and
irreprehensible ...’.(List B, No. 19 l, 18 April 2003).

• [Richard]: ‘(...) Richard’s condition, as evidenced in a pure consciousness experience (PCE), is a
most salubrious and irreprehensible condition ...’.(

Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 18f, 14 January 2005).

• [Richard]: ‘(...) the salubrity and irreprehensibility of life in this actual world is pristine ..’.(Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 43, 25 April 2003).

Moreover, as I clearly state that it is sanity which is the problem (and that insanity is not the solution),
the entire email exchange starting at ...(List B, No. 19 l, 12 April 2003)
... and going on for 9-10 emails is well worth a read.

Here are a few excerpts. Vis.:

• [Respondent]: ‘Are you telling me that when I see bombs dropping and people with their limbs blown off
that what I am seeing is sane ...

• [Richard]: ‘Yes ... the bombs dropping, and people with their limbs blown off, is nothing other than
sanity in action. And sanity prevails all over the world: for instance an estimated 2.5 million [currently 5.0 million] sane
peoples have been killed in the civil war in the Congo (aka Zaire) by their sane fellow human beings ... perhaps it is because it
is not being displayed 24/7 on television screens there seems to be very little outrage. Or maybe it is because without the good
ol’ US of A to yet again mercilessly whip around the block there is no outlet for the outrage?
It is sanity which is the problem world-wide ... it is what you are seeing when observing the world (peoples in general) and
yourself’.(List B, No. 19 l, 13 April 2003b)

• [Richard]: ‘(...) you classified what you see, when observing the world (peoples in general) and
yourself, as being [quote] ‘insanity’ [endquote] and all I did was point out that what was really going on was sanity in
action (and, further to the point, that sanity sucks big-time)’.(List B, No. 19 l, 18
April 2003)

• [Richard]: ‘(...) Speaking personally, for the first 34 years of my life I was sane (the ordinary,
normal, common, or everyday sanity of people in general all over the world) and peace-on-earth was nowhere to be found; for the
next 11 years I was in a transformed state of being (which I gradually came to realise was an institutionalised insanity) called
The Absolute or Truth, God, Being, Presence, Self, and so on, which was exemplified by (...) a timeless, spaceless, formless
immortal otherness which was a peace that passeth all understanding ... yet all the while peace-on-earth was still nowhere to be
found. By ‘institutionalised’ I mean altered states of consciousness that have become institutions over the aeons: instituted
as being states of consciousness which are universally accepted as the summum bonum of human existence ... a model to either live
by, aspire to, become, or be. (...)’.(List B, No. 19 l, 18 April 2003).

• [Richard]: ‘When ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself) becomes extinct
all its states of being, ranging from sanity through to insanity, also cease to be ... there is no ‘presence’ whatsoever here
in this actual world to be either sane or insane. I just find it cute that the solution to all the ills of humankind be considered
insanity by sane people (most of whom live by, or aspire to become, the model provided by the insanity of the altered states of
consciousness which have become institutionalised over the aeons by being universally accepted as the summum bonum of human
existence anyway).’(List B, No. 19 l, 18 April 2003)

• [Richard]: (...). Here in this actual world all is salubrious and irreprehensible ... just consider, for
a moment if you will, that it is only a sanity-based analysis which would determine that permanent happiness and harmlessness be
insanity (it speaks volumes about the nature of sanity that it does so). I know I have said it many times before but I will say it
again for emphasis: I do find it cute that peace-on-earth, in this lifetime as this flesh and blood body, be considered a chronic
and incurable psychotic mental disorder’.(List B, No. 19 l, 18 April 2003).
[end excerpts].

RESPONDENT: So they aren’t quite a deliberate process of a guy to get into
enlightement ...

RICHARD: The identity inhabiting this flesh-and-blood body all those years ago was not engaged in a
process to ‘get into enlightenment’ at all (as already mentioned ‘he’ knew naught of enlightenment) as what ‘he’
was actively involved in was enabling the peerless purity and pristine perfection which had been indelibly imprinted in ‘his’
(non-affective) memory banks during a 4-hour PCE six months previously.

RESPONDENT: ... and later, AF, but outcomes out of those two major
breakdowns?

RICHARD: If I might suggest? Try reading at least some of what is freely available on The Actual
Freedom Trust web site, first, before asking me what has the appearance of being un-researched and/ or ill-informed questions.

RESPONDENT No. 4: It’s a good example. What came of it, loud and clear,
after defusing all the passionate attack/ defense stuff is:

1) Richard isn’t going to be put in the position of either confirming or denying
any unauthorised content, for reasons he explained.

2) But, he’s also not going to withhold content that’s relevant to people’s
lives, as in his forthright admission that the mental disorders he suffered after the war went *way* beyond PTSD.

RESPONDENT: Apart from past what about your other allegations abt Richard
crying.. Stuff that hap in India and all the rest of the stuff that you said and heard.. Are you now sayin all of them were lies?

Or they are still valid but you have decided to push those discrepancies under the
rug?

This is an serious enquiry from my part. It would help me formulate my own thoughts
about the whole enterprise.

Was it all just a smear campaign and lies?

RICHARD: G’day No. 29, Yes, it was indeed ‘all just a smear campaign and lies’.

The term ‘made-up stuff’ is but a milder way of saying that it is all a pack of lies ... lies and deceit.

Regards, Richard.

January 11 2013

Re: Privacy vs. Public Interest

RICHARD: [...]. If I might suggest? Try reading at least some of what is freely available on The
Actual Freedom Trust web site, first, before asking me what has the appearance of being unresearched and/or ill-informed
questions.

Before doing so, however, please read Message No. 10915.

RESPONDENT: [...]. You haven’t responded to the rest of my mail about all
the allegations and you have already stated before that you won’t be. So that’s that. It will be upto me to take a call though
on the authencity of those reports. Of course, there is no way I can make a proper call! If i trust them, it will be on faith that
those who made them were true and If I don’t trust them, I am making it on faith they were lying or mistaken. either way it’s
a subjective guess work on my part. Hmmm...

RICHARD: G’day No. 29, I did not respond to the rest of your email ‘about all the allegations’
partly for the reason my response was way too long already but mainly because to have done so would have detracted from the far,
far more important central theme ... to wit: that it is sanity which is the problem (and that insanity is not the solution).

Look, here is the essence of what you are referring to as ‘the allegations’ in the rest of your
email. Vis.:

• [Respondent]: ‘[...]. The first and two points leads someone like to me doubt whether Actualism is a
worth pursuit.
Then one reads all those stuff; allegations about the events in India. Did you commit a fraud there? Why were there investigators
who took your memory stick?
There are reports of you dragging someone and sitting on their neck, of you even crying, regretting about getting old and other
stuff like that. So all of this racks up on top of each other and creates a big cloud of doubt. [...]. You are the guy who has
lived in actual freedom the longest. And if there is something disturbing in your acts, then it makes one think about that freedom
itself.
Does it make a guy incapable of seeing that he himself is suffering (showing signs of) bad behaviour even? So as one gets all
these doubts, one wants to debate them. It can either lead to clearing of those doubts or make one decide that actualism isn’t
something worthful to pursue.
That’s all I am doing currently on this forum. (Message No. 12xxx)

I will now demonstrate something via the very first question you asked me ... namely:

• [Respondent]: Then one reads all those stuff; allegations about the events in India. Did you commit a
fraud there? [endquote].

First, I will draw your attention to what I wrote on Wednesday the 2nd of January 2013, at 3:04 am, in
Message No. 12293. Vis.:

• [Respondent No. 3]: Hi Richard. As far as i am aware this issue has not been (properly) addressed yet. as
to: [I say clandestine because the directors of The Actual Freedom Trust have been aware for quite some time of emails being
privately circulated containing all manner of made-up stuff about ‘Richard & his associates’]. Since you seem to have
inside information with regard to the existance of particulary ‘made up stuff’ about ‘Richard & his associates’. Can
and will you please provide any of the content of that material such as for perusal as to what kind of [emails being privately
circulated containing all manner of made-up stuff about ‘Richard & his associates’] have been intercepted by the directors
of The Actual Freedom Trust?

• [Richard]: G’day No. 3, What the directors were aware of was that emails were being privately
circulated (clandestinely) and not the contents ... a person on another forum, for instance, publicly reported he had received one
(and an entire thread was started on that very topic).

• [Respondent No. 3]: Particulary an expression the like ‘all manner made-up stuff ‘ i find somewhat at
odds with your usually accurately providing references to material, such as that a reader can make up s/his own opinion on the
matter at hand.

• [Richard]: The person – or even persons – who was/who were ‘as yet unknown’ did not have/has not
had the common decency and/or extend the common courtesy of Cc-ing either me or the directors a copy/copies.
Hence my vague ‘all manner of made-up stuff’.
In short: I have been/am being asked to rebut/refute many and various things I was not/have not been informed of by the person –
or even persons – who was/who were ‘as yet unknown’.
Hence also my usage of ‘poltroons’. [...].(Richard to No. 3, 2 January 2013)

Now, back to that very first question of yours. Vis.:

• [Respondent]: Then one reads all those stuff; allegations about the events in India. Did you commit a
fraud there? [endquote].

The key words are [quote] ‘one reads all those stuff’ [endquote], right?

Now, I have read every word that the ... um ... the ‘star witness’ has posted to this forum, since she
commenced her vindictive smear campaign, all of her own accord, at 1:45 pm on Thursday the 15th of September, 2011, and nowhere do
I recall any mention of her phantom ‘Richard’ having committed a fraud in India.

If you will provide the relevant message number – of the original post and not someone’s compilation –
so that I can read just what it is you are referring to it might throw some light upon the matter.

What I can say, in the meanwhile, is that nobody from the Indian Police or the Indian Government – be they
State or Federal – has contacted me, since my departure from India over two years ago, in regards to any matter at all (let
alone any such fraud (purportedly) having been committed whilst in India).

Indeed, there was no hold-up at all during the departure process at Trivandrum Airport, just prior to flying
out on 02/09/2010, and the Immigration & Customs officials are the first to be notified in regards detaining suspect visitors.

Regards, Richard.

January 11 2013

Re: Privacy vs. Public Interest

RICHARD: [...].

RESPONDENT: [...]. Then one reads all those stuff; allegations about the
events in India. Did you commit a fraud there? Why were there investigators who took your memory stick? There are reports of you
dragging someone and sitting on their neck ...

RICHARD: G’day No. 29, ‘Tis fascinating to see that your phantom ‘Richard’ is ‘sitting on
their neck’ (i.e. the neck of a phantom ‘someone’).

Whereas, for instance, [No. 5 (Sock Puppet ‘H’)] has his phantom ‘Richard’ sitting on a terrified
phantom woman’s chest (as well as horrifying his phantom visitors by squeezing her phantom throat till she is ‘breathless’).
(Message No. 11xxx).

As the ... um ... the ‘star witness’ has her phantom ‘Richard’ sitting on his phantom partner’s
chest – and holding her down with both his phantom hands on her phantom neck (Message No. 10570) – it would surely be worth
your while to ask the person she got her hearsay account from just what the truth of the matter is, would it not? Vis.:

• [No. 6 (Sock Puppet ‘AA’)]: Hi No. 19, [List Owner]
Looks like Richard is intent on having his dirty linen be washed in a web forum, that’s why my expressed request about not been
dragged into mud slinging has gone past his head. He is not only mixing me up again with many persons who have been writing in
this forum, but is intent upon maligning me yet again. I have written in this forum via the pen name [No. 6 (Sock Puppet ‘A’)]
( and since my mail account was breached several times, I have deleted it since).
Prior to that I wrote by another name, which I changed due to privacy reasons. I have used no other name/ alias/ pen name to write
in this forum. [...].
the account I gave in the post of an AF partner perpetrating violence against a non - AF partner is what [...name deleted...] has
personally told me.

Now, I have deliberately removed the name she gave because, somewhere along the line, all you people
regurgitating all this made-up stuff do need to look – with your own eyes – at what was actually written, in the original
text, because it is demonstrably evident that imagination is stitching together some disparate ‘data’-points – all of which
are also imaginary, – so as to make something other than what actually happened a (feeling-fed) ‘reality’.

I have written to this forum about this much-lauded aspect of being a feeling-being (i.e. the imaginative
facility) only recently. Vis.:

• [Richard to Claudiu]: ‘Of course, for the person concerned, in situations like this (and there have
been more than a few face-to-face instances for me over the years), it is not a charade but a passionate truth as imagination
stitches together a multiplicity of otherwise disparate ‘data’-points, most of which are also imaginary, into a (seemingly)
seamless whole. (Message No. 12303).

Note well how I provided [No. 5 (Sock Puppet ‘H’)] with a one-off opportunity to produce his so-called ‘reports’,
of [quote] ‘perverted woman bashing’ [endquote], and yet he failed to do so. (That way he can keep on making
assertions, such as ‘its about time something was done before it gets even more out of hand and YOU physically hurt someone
AGAIN!’ in Message No. 12xxx via avoidance of having been
brought face-to-face with what his so-called ‘reports’ actually say).

So, it is up to you, now.

Regards, Richard.

January 11 2013

Re: Privacy vs. Public Interest

RICHARD: [...]. I did not respond to the rest of your email ‘about all the allegations’
partly for the reason my response was way too long already but mainly because to have done so would have detracted from the far,
far more important central theme ... to wit: that it is sanity which is the problem (and that insanity is not the solution).

RESPONDENT: Okay. My concern was you arrived at actual freedom from a
position of insanity. And further that insanity itself arrived from a severe psychotic disorder. So whether the enterprise is
conducive for normal people like me. I use normal here to talk about guys without any breakdown and disorders. And sane. You have
pointed out that sanity is the problem. I wonder whether the mutations that is entailed in actualism process can be done by normal
people. The likes of vineeto peter and few others have shown that it can be done.

Let me digest all of this.

RICHARD: G’day No. 29, Sure ... just a couple of minor points, in regards to your reply above, to
aid the digestive process.

First, I did indeed arrive at an actual freedom from the human condition from ‘a position of insanity’
(aka fully-fledged spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment).

However, to say further that ‘insanity itself arrived from a severe psychotic disorder’ is to
confuse terminology within itself as the word insanity is but another word for the (politically correct) term ‘severe
psychotic disorder’. (Otherwise, what you are saying, in effect, is ‘and further that insanity itself arrived from
insanity’).

Second, regarding whether the enterprise is conducive for normal people like yourself (people without any
breakdown, disorders and sane): nobody, absolutely nobody, has to and/or needs to – or even can nowadays (if they were silly
enough to want to) – follow in my footsteps.

The direct-route to an actual freedom – a down-to-earth manumission hitherto only available dangerously
via spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment – obviates going through (institutionalised) insanity to get to the other side.

Regards, Richard.

January 12 2013

Re: Privacy vs. Public Interest

RICHARD: [...] regarding whether the enterprise is conducive for normal people like yourself (people
without any breakdown, disorders and sane): nobody, absolutely nobody, has to and/or needs to – or even can nowadays (if they
were silly enough to want to) – follow in my footsteps.

The direct-route to an actual freedom – a down-to-earth manumission hitherto only available dangerously via
spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment – obviates going through (institutionalised) insanity to get to the other side.

RESPONDENT: Curious about the usage of manumission. It refers to the act of
the slave owner freeing his slaves. Why are you using it in this context? Any particular reason?

RICHARD: G’day No. 29, Yes, it is a particularly apt word I specifically selected when I first
started to put together ‘Richard’s Personal Web Page’ – a more biographical account, with many snapshots taken at various
stages of my life going back to childhood, of my discovery presented in a secular way (and which goes into the personal details of
my childhood experiences, my military experience, my marriage experiences, my parental experiences, my artistic experiences, my
latter-day lifestyle and so on and so forth) – so as to quite graphically convey just what a vital role it is ‘I’ have to
play in setting free the flesh-and-blood body that is ‘my’ unwitting host.

To set the context I will first draw your attention to what feeling-being ‘Peter’ wrote (for example) at
the very beginning of ‘his’ opus ‘Introducing Actual Freedom’ presentation. Vis.:

‘For thousands of years, human beings have searched in vain for genuine freedom, peace and happiness. Now,
for the first time, a proven method has been devised to eliminate the genetically-encoded instinctual passions of fear,
aggression, nurture and desire, the very passions that are the root cause of *human bondage*, malice and sorrow (...)’.[emphasis added]. Introduction to Actual Freedom, Index

That second sentence conveys the information that the genetically-encoded instinctual passions (fear,
aggression, nurture and desire) are the root cause of ‘human bondage’ – the slavery/ servitude of the flesh and blood body
to its master/ its overlord who is called, in actualism terminology, the identity within – plus the malice and sorrow which
arises out of those passions/ that identity.

To explain that latter point first: both malice and sorrow are not instinctual passions per se but arise in
the human animal because of its unique-amongst-animals ability to be aware of being conscious/ of being sentient, which thereby
automatically forms an affective identity/a feeling being who is those very passions in action – as in ‘I’ am ‘my’
feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’ – and that affective identity/ that feeling being is malicious and sorrowful (and,
compensatingly, loving and compassionate) as a result of thus being conscious/ being aware of its innate ‘good and bad’
dichotomous nature, popularly known as ‘the human condition’, and all the misery and mayhem it brings about by its very
presence/ the very passions it is).

Now, the slavery which the word bondage refers to is also expressed via the word thralldom at the bottom of
every web-page, on my portion of The Actual Freedom Trust web site, as well as being situated at the top of my homepage. Vis.:

• bondage: serfdom, slavery; (hist.) tenure in villeinage, services due from a tenant to a proprietor. (Oxford Dictionary).

• thralldom: the state or condition of being a thrall [a person in bondage to a lord or master; a villein,
a serf, a slave]. (Oxford Dictionary).

At the risk of belabouring the point: that tenant/ person/ villein/ serf/ slave is, as it were, the flesh and
blood body and that proprietor/ lord/ master is, so to speak, the identity within (who persuades and/or dictates or in any other
way forces the body to act or behave in a reprehensible or insalubrious manner).

Hence my usage of manumission (and/or manumit, manumited); also, because it is an unusual word/a word not in
common usage, there is the likely possibility a reader/listener will take note of it – look it up if they truly want to know
what is being referred to – and remember it, later, if only because of its quaintness. Vis.:

(I have a predilection for utilising little-known words/obsolete words – such as psittacisms, those
mechanical repetitions of previously received ideas or images reflecting neither apperception nor autonomous reasoning, instead
of, say, clichés – for this very reason).

I will take this opportunity to add that an as-fully-informed-as-possible identity is vital to the whole
process as only an identity, and no-one else, can set its host free.

For instance:

• [Richard]: ‘... you have a vital role to play, not only in regards peace-on-earth, in this lifetime as
that flesh and blood body, but in enabling the already always existing meaning of life (or ‘the purpose of the universe’ or
‘the reason for existence’ or however one’s quest may be described) into becoming apparent.
In short: your freedom, or lack thereof, is in your hands and your hands alone’.Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 80, 28 December 2004

Another way of putting it is that identity has a job to do. Vis.:

• [Gary]: ‘Is it correct to say that ‘I’ am in abeyance during the PCE?
• [Richard]: ‘That was the word that occurred to me to describe the experience ... ‘suspended’, maybe (as in ‘the
operation has been suspended until further notice’)?
• [Gary]: ‘Or is it more accurate to say that ‘I’ have vacated the scene completely and totally?
• [Richard]: ‘Oh, yes, there is a marked absence of ‘me’ during the experience ... perhaps it is more correct to say that
it is after the experience, when ‘I’ reappear, that in hindsight it becomes obvious that ‘I’ was in abeyance?
• [Gary]: ‘What causes ‘me’ to return?
• [Richard]: ‘Because ‘I’ have a job to do: ‘I’ am going to make the most noble sacrifice that ‘I’ can make for
this body and that body and every body ... for ‘I’ am what ‘I’ hold most dear. It is ‘my’ moment of glory. It is ‘my’
crowning achievement ... it makes ‘my’ petty life all worthwhile. It is not an event to be missed ... to physically die
without having experienced what it is like to become dead is such a waste of a life’.Actual Freedom Mailing List, Gary, 15 August 2000

Regards, Richard.

June 9 2013

Re: Few humble words from Justine

RICHARD to No. 4: [...] And it is not correct because what you had actually said, in that post being
referred to, was in relation to a woman who back then was in New Zealand (which, as you rightly noted in your previous email, is
not ‘another continent’).

CLAUDIU: G’day Richard, For what it’s worth, I appreciate the
clarification here. I didn’t look back at [No.4]’s #11349 when he first replied to [No. 37], but based just on that message to [No. 37] + #11349, I
would have assumed that ‘he was actively trying to woo another woman back into a full-time sexual relationship with him (which
she had suspended while trying to decide her future)’ referred to that ‘woman on another continent’.

It actually does seem like a really simple thing that did get massively overblown.

RICHARD to Claudiu: Thank you for your feedback; especially so as I was beginning to wonder whether it
was worth my while to continue writing about any topic/any issue if none of the peoples active on this forum could comprehend
something which – to me anyway – was such an obvious thing I even hesitated writing in to point
it out in the first place.

RESPONDENT: Hi Richard This is what I got from this latest interactions
between you and [No. 4].

RICHARD: G’day No. 29, Thank you for your feedback; especially so as it is of much assistance in
regards to what areas of [No. 4]’s self-proclaimed ‘on-site observation’ and ‘reliable ... observation’
still need to be addressed and exposed for the self-evident deceit they are.

RESPONDENT: 1)In his original post, [No. 4] had referred to your ex wife.

RICHARD: Yes, clearly and unambiguously: his words ‘back into’ are distinctly different to ‘recruiting
another’ inasmuch the former refers to a prior situation (purportedly) being re-established and the latter to a
(purportedly) yet-to-be established situation.

Is it clear to you, from my recent posts, that neither his ‘back into’ words nor his ‘recruiting
another’ words are a product of either ‘on-site observation’ or ‘reliable ... observation’? If not,
read on (immediately below).

RESPONDENT: 2) The interpretation sustained by not correcting [No. 37]’s
‘remembrance’ replaces ‘ex wife’ with the other lady, who, these days, owns a negative belief about you and who has quit
the forum, after alleging a lot of dramatic stuff about you, which led to doubts about you, and actualism, in many people’s
mind.

RICHARD: Yes, and the self-evident deceit in this situation is the fact that he (No. 4) prefaces his ‘recruiting
another’ words with both the word ‘actively’ and the date ‘February 2010’.

• [Respondent No. 4]: [...]
• [Respondent No. 6 (Sock-Puppet ‘W’)]: [...].
• [Respondent No. 4]: [...]. In February 2010 the genitor of actual freedom [...] was in the process of actively recruiting
another woman to be his full-time, live-in sex partner, along with his other partners. [...].

Not only had the woman he refers to recruited herself (to use his phraseology) but the fact she did so in
December 2009 makes it self-evident that his ‘recruiting another’ words are not a product of either ‘on-site
observation’ or ‘reliable ... observation’.

RESPONDENT: So, as an aside, can one then infer that you never tried to enter
into a relationship with this lady (not your ex wife) and her fears of you were about whole lot of different issues (which I would
like to clarify in this manner but not sure whether you are ready to go with me on that ride; if not, you can perhaps give a
reason for not wanting. If you can talk about that issue, then we can start it later to sort out the intrpretations of her
allegations) ?

RICHARD: There is no need to infer as I have been up-front and out-in-the-open about my part in what
actually transpired.

• [Richard]: [...].
• [Respondent No. 4]: [...].
• [Richard]: Incidentally, when someone informs me (upon me having carefully questioned them whether they had meant ‘meet’,
and not ‘join’, in a previous email) that they intend to join me – and the other actualists – on the MSV Actualis
itself there is simply no way I can understand this, by any stretch of the language, as being rightfully characterised as [quote] ‘the
genitor ... in the process of actively recruiting’ [end quote] that person.

• [Richard]: [...].
• [Respondent No. 4]: [...].
• [Richard]: [...] it is impossible to sustain the allegation of ‘recruiting another’ when it becomes evident that she had
already recruited herself (and that all Richard had done was to delightedly acquiesce and whole-heartedly support). [...].

As for [quote] ‘her fears of you’ [endquote] the following, straight from the horse’s mouth,
should suffice for the nonce. Vis.:

• [Respondent No. 4]: [...]. The reason I didn’t contact Richard back in late 2010 was because I felt
like I’d been duped, that the whole actual freedom thing was a giant delusion, and Richard was about the last person I’d want
to be associated with in any way. (If you suddenly learn things that make you think you’ve been part of a deluded cult, you
generally don’t go to the cult leader to talk about your concerns; you get the fuck out of there and you warn a few friends).
[...].

• [Richard]: [...].
• [Respondent No. 24]: [...].
• [Richard]: [...]. Perhaps if I were to spell it out graphically: there is a person, as yet unknown – or even persons, maybe,
also as yet unknown – who are frightening her, scaring her out of her wits, almost, by the look of it, so as to advance their
own agenda ... namely: their crusade to rid the planet of actualism/ actual freedom.
For she is their ‘Star Witness’ (so to speak) in their clandestine campaign to discredit and/or destroy ‘Richard’.
And I say clandestine because the directors of The Actual Freedom Trust have been aware for quite some time of emails being
privately circulated containing all manner of made-up stuff about ‘Richard & his associates’. [...].

Please note that his ‘warn a few friends’ actions stemmed from feelings and not facts ... as
expressed explicitly in his preceding [quote] ‘because I felt like I’d been duped’ [endquote] words.

RESPONDENT: 3) There have been clarifications about [No. 4]’s original post
itself. That wooing ( and words of that ilk) is not the correct word to be used as there was no such thing done by you.

RICHARD: Exactly.

RESPONDENT: That it was your wife who was interested in the
communal-lifestyle and wanted to get back-into. Also, she had taken a break from the relationship because she got frightened of
perfection (which clarified yet another [No. 4]’s perspective).

Hmm ...

1) your wife wanted to come back after being frightened of perfection, and you just
encouraged it. There was no active recruiting.

2) You never wooed the other lady or tried to actively recruit her either.

RICHARD: The following – heavily edited for reasons of space – will show that the words ‘back
into’ (a nuclear couple association/a nuclear household living arrangement) do not adequately convey what was planned for
‘The Floating Convivium Project’. Vis.:

• [Richard]: [...].
• [Respondent No. 12]: [...].
• [Richard]: [...] the name convivialist – for a person living convivially in a convivium – will serve to distinguish them
from those isolated nuclear couples living in separative nuclear households/ lifestyles [...].
It thus became obvious that by continuing to keep myself locked away, so to speak, in an exclusive nuclear couple/ nuclear family
type of living arrangement there would continue to be a denial of access, to my fellow human beings at large, for any such
potentially potent interactions. [...].
There is more to both an actual and a virtual freedom from the human condition than nuclear couples living in separate homes; the
overall aim is to provide the genesis of peoples living peacefully and harmoniously together on a community-wide basis. [...].
So as to provide some idea of what is planned: the MSV Actualis has eight cabins – in four suites each with a common washroom
(with basin/ shower/ toilet) plus common tea-and coffee-making facilities à la motels, betwixt each – with wall-to-wall beds
(king-size beds in popular parlance) with one cabin for each (nominal) crew-member and at least one cabin always reserved for
guests ... a guest cabin, in other words.
Put simplistically: no married couples; only single people living intimately as one big happy (and harmless) convivium. [...].

Personally, if I were the one to have written what became known as ‘[No. 4]’s Historical Statement’ I
would have used words such as ‘move forward into’, rather than ‘back into’, but, then again, I am not a
feeling-being who had [quote] ‘felt like I’d been duped’ [endquote] at the time of writing.

Here is an actual freedom from the Human Condition, surpassing Spiritual Enlightenment and
any other Altered State Of Consciousness, and challenging all philosophy, psychiatry, metaphysics (including quantum physics with
its mystic cosmogony), anthropology, sociology ... and any religion along with its paranormal theology. Discarding all of the
beliefs that have held humankind in thralldom for aeons, the way has now been discovered that cuts through the ‘Tried and True’
and enables anyone to be, for the first time, a fully free and autonomous individual living in utter peace and tranquillity,
beholden to no-one.